On Jan 1, 2006, at 17:15, Manuel Mall wrote:

The Knuth algorithm (read the paper) deals only with box/pen/glue for
the purpose of breaking lines and if it breaks a line it takes certain
actions with respect to discarding pen/glue elements directly following
the break it created. If it doesn't create a line break it leaves
everything as it is. This means everything at the beginning and end of
a paragraph is left untouched. line-feed-treatment at the beginning and
end of a paragraph is not influenced by the Knuth algorithm and
therefore cannot be controlled by whatever sequences we generate.

Ahem... I do get your point, but the fact of the matter remains that the trailing spaces should be removed for the reason that they would end up at the end of a *line-area*, not because they end up at the end of the *paragraph*.

I have no trouble grasping the idea that the Knuth algorithm only creates effective breaks in intermediate positions, and takes certain actions for those breaks. Ok, so that means the start- or end-of- paragraph line-break is not created by this algorithm in itself, and remains out-of-scope here. Would it not be a much easier and much more straightforward solution to have every paragraph end with an infinitely low penalty, so that the algorithm eventually treats trailing spaces in the last line-area just the same as it would for 'normal' line-breaks?

We can control line-feed-treatment at Knuth generated breaks by
constructing the proper sequences which we will do eventually. But
start/end paragraph is outside of that which is why I am keen to push
it into the FO refinement stage (as it used to be).

As I said, it's all the same to me. If you (and a few others, of course) think we were better off before I committed my changes, then by all means, go ahead and revert... I did my homework, and posted it as a patch for review first. As I recall, only Finn had anything to add, and his comment was taken into account. The rest of you remained silent, which I consider to be at least a '+0' (= go ahead if you want to, but don't expect any assistance from us, because we already have our hands full).



Reply via email to